(I understand everything you said above until this. Do we need to discuss the 'theory' of gravity again?)

Gravity is a theory. For all I know, there is no force between objects. It's all enforced by a Creator for example. For all I know, material objects don't exist, and only souls exists, and there is a designer giving rise to our experience of the material world.

The whole way the world works, atoms, etc, perhaps none of the laws are intrinsic to existence. They simply are being imposed by a higher power.

If gravity was a fact, I would suspect the philosophical argument of whether we know a physical world exists would be debunked.

So, your god creates a massive delusion in which gravity doesn't exist and inanimate objects and even the physical body are illusions while also creating the illusion of suffering such as rape, starvation, disease, murder and so on. That makes you an unwilling player in one sick son of a bitch's drama. I'll take the reality of all of that and know there is something I can do to fix it.

However, we have no evidence that this is the case. We experience a world that seems real to us, and have no reason to believe it is not real. The logical course of action to take, then, is to act as though the world is real. Provide some evidence that the world isn't real, and then we can consider it.

Right, and for all we know the whole world is just my dream and everyone else is just a construct of my mind and when I "die" I actually just wake up and realize that I'm just a brain in a jar. Or we could all be in the Matrix. However, given that anything beyond what we can sense or detect is pure conjecture and that observing the universe using our senses and measurements seems to work I say we keep doing that rather than pursuing some God or brain in a vat that is unprovable and really adds nothing to our understanding of the universe.

Gravity is a theory. For all I know, there is no force between objects.

The funny part is that MysticKnight is actually on the cutting edge of astrophysics, but for all the wrong reasons. Diametrically wrong reasons. He'd never accept the real reasons.

The whole way the world works, atoms, etc, perhaps none of the laws are intrinsic to existence. They simply are being imposed by a higher power.

Ok, but why are they then thus debunked and not fact? If they are "being imposed by a higher power", aren't they then just as real for us? What is reality? How far does "reality" reach beyond independent existence and imposed presence?

Do the tides in the ocean exist? They are mearly imposed by the power of the moon and have no independent existence, so are they real or not?

Theory: something to which all evidence points to and can be considered a proven fact.
Hypothesis: something to which some collected points point to, but not yet proven.
^- You meant this.

And now, from the input and output the "philosophical argument of whether we know a physical world exists" can't be debunked or proven at all, as all evidence is input and output of an intelligent being, that which we consider evidence could be faked at all times. All that said though, there is, pragmatically speaking, no reason to assume such a vitual system of faked input and output, as we have pretty much seen that the question whether it is fake or not, does not matter if input and output still effect us. Or shorter: doesn't fuckin' matter anyway.

Then by the same logic, since god or the creator is a human concept, we can say vice-versa. Seriously, don't use philosophy as rebuttal against science; it won't work very well, especially if don't know bum-fuck about either one.